The matters related to marriages, divorce, etc. of the religious minorities are governed by the following laws, known as personal laws;

The Succession Act 1925, The Christian Marriage Act 1872, The Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1886, The Divorce Act 1869, Indian (Non-Domiciled Parties) Divorce Rules 1927, The Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936, The Hindu Widow’s Marriage Act 1856, The Hindu Marriage Disabilities Removal Act 1946, The Hindu Married Woman’s Rights to separate Residence and Maintenance Act 1946, The Anand Marriage Act 1909, Buddhist Law 1909, The Arya Marriage Validation Act 1937.

Problems with personal laws

1. The main problem with these laws is their antiquity. These laws promulgated in pre-independence period, before the human rights standards were set, are redundant and source of human rights violations. They were never reviewed after the creation of Pakistan.

2. The overriding effect of the subsequent Islamic legislation has changed the entire concept and application of the personal laws of the religious minorities. For instance, adultery is one of the main grounds for dissolution of a Christian marriage under the Hudood laws (Zina Ordinance VII, 1979) punishable by stoning to death and later imprisonment for 25 years (Women Protection Act 2006). The Christians, in the circumstances of dissolution of marriage can not invoke their personal law due to the common (Islamic) laws. The matter was made more complicated when the qualifications for a court testimony reduced the value of a non-Muslim witness in Hudood laws in 1979 and Law of Evidence 1984.

3. The third issue is manipulability of the personal laws of religious minorities on pretext of conversion to Islam. Numerous Christian and Hindu girls, mostly minors, have been taken away from their families after their reported abduction and conversion to Islam.

Abduction and marriage

Mr. Misri Ludhani a Hindu father, in his petition challenged the authorization of his daughter’s marriage (Ms. Neelam) by the lower court who reportedly converted to Islam to marry Amjad, a Muslim man. The gravity of the situation concerning the conversion of minority women was felt by the superior judiciary also. Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan presiding over this petition on May 25, 2006 gave an interesting verdict.

Exercising its ‘parental jurisdiction’ the court ordered the family of the husband to furnish a bank bond of Rs. 1.5 million as a guarantee for Neelam’s welfare. The Supreme Court also instructed the family of the husband to facilitate the occasional visit of the girl with her family. Daily Pakistan, May 26, 2006

On this implicit recognition of the underlying problems, the Supreme Court established two principles:
a) The minority women need protection from any restriction on their freedom of movement and well being and violence against women in case of interfaith marriages.
b) The conversion does not mean that the one converting to Islam has to relinquish relationship with one’s family.

Second marriage after conversion

The lawlessness and persecution of minorities due to various economic, social and political factors make the minority women even more vulnerable to sexual harassment, rape and abduction. Given that religious sentiments are easily manipulated against the religious minorities in Pakistan, the conversion of women and minors after their families report them missing should not be taken as normal.

The Federal Shariat Court’s judgment in Ms. Kundan Mai vs. The State (PLD 1988, FSC 89) established that Iddat (three months waiting period) was a precondition for a re-marriage under the Islamic law even in case of conversion of a non-Muslim married woman. Also in the Sardar Masih vs. Haider Masih case (PLD 1988) and the more recent precedent of Ms. Fatima Bibi vs. Station House Officer, Ichchra Police Station, Lahore, Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif of Lahore High Court (PLD 2005, Lahore 126) upheld the view that a non-Muslim married woman must invite her husband to embrace Islam and her earlier marriage under Christian rites does not stand automatically dissolved after embracing Islam. The above mentioned case laws (precedents) prove that the injustices and abuse in personal laws vis-à-vis conversion has been noticed by the higher judiciary in various judgments, however judicial pronouncements are no substitute to a proper legislation.